FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA: A federal judge on Saturday, July 6, rejected an effort by Walt Nauta, a co-defendant in former president Donald J Trump’s classified documents case, to have the charges against him dismissed.

Nauta, who works as Trump’s personal aide, claimed he was a victim of a vindictive prosecution by the government.

Walt Nauta alleges vindictive prosecution

Walt Nauta’s defense hinged on accusations against the prosecutors in the office of Special Counsel Jack Smith. Nauta alleged that the prosecutors unfairly indicted him because he refused to testify against Trump before a grand jury.

Nauta's lawyer Stanley Woodward Jr further claimed that during a meeting at the Justice Department two years ago, prosecutors threatened to derail his pursuit of a judgeship if he did not persuade the former to cooperate against Trump.

However, Judge Aileen M Cannon dismissed these arguments in an order issued on Saturday night. She stated that despite Nauta’s refusal to provide testimony against Trump, there was "no evidence suggesting that charges were brought to punish him for doing so."

Judge Cannon also did not delve into the specifics of Woodward’s claims about prosecutorial coercion, noting that the allegations were directed against the government’s bias toward Woodward himself, not Nauta, which is a necessary component for a vindictive prosecution claim under the law.

The indictment, filed in June in Federal District Court in Fort Pierce, Florida, accuses Nauta of conspiring with Trump to conceal several boxes of classified materials that Trump took from the White House to Mar-a-Lago, his private club, and residence in Florida, after leaving the White House.

Prosecutors allege that Nauta was involved in a scheme to destroy security camera footage showing him and another Mar-a-Lago employee, Carlos De Oliveira, moving the boxes. Both Nauta and De Oliveira have also been charged with lying to investigators.

Allegations of prosecutorial misconduct

Woodward’s claim about coercion by Jay I Bratt, one of Smith’s top deputies, at a Justice Department meeting has been a contentious point in the case. According to Woodward, Bratt attempted to pressure him into securing Nauta’s cooperation. Prosecutors have strongly denied this allegation.

During a hearing in May in Fort Pierce, David Harbach, Bratt’s colleague, dismissed Woodward’s account as entirely fabricated. "The story about what happened at that meeting is a fantasy," Harbach stated. "It did not happen."

Judge Cannon, in her order, seemed to take a neutral stance, noting that she did not infer misconduct by the prosecutors nor did she doubt Woodward’s honesty in conveying his recollection.

She mentioned that the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility was investigating Woodward’s allegations but was postponing any action until the completion of the case.

In a related development, Trump has filed his own vindictive prosecution motion against Smith and his team.

Trump contends that the charges are part of a partisan effort to derail his presidential campaign. He also argues that the government is unfairly targeting him, pointing out that other public figures found in possession of classified documents, including President Biden, were not indicted.

Judge Cannon has yet to rule on Trump’s motion but noted that her decision to reject Nauta’s motion should not be interpreted as commenting on the merits of Trump’s claims.

The judge continues to address various motions to dismiss the charges in the case filed by Trump’s lawyers and his two co-defendants.

Earlier this week, Trump’s legal team requested permission to file additional legal briefs, arguing that he enjoys immunity from prosecution following a landmark Supreme Court ruling that provides him broad protection against criminal charges related to actions taken in his official capacity as president, the New York Times reported.

Judge Aileen Cannon slammed for ruling against Walt Nauta

Despite her ruling against Nauta, Judge Aileen Cannon faced criticism from Donald Trump’s detractors on social media.

"So, she's throwing us a crumb? If she had granted it, would we be chatting with the 11th Circuit?" one social media user asked on X.

"All bulls**t, just to make herself look like she is the LAW," another alleged.

"Poor Walt. Judge Cannon is only going to protect Trump. Maybe in Walt’s trial, we’ll learn some new information about Trump’s involvement in the document theft cover-up," one comment read.

"Walt is learning that Cannon is going to treat HIM like the criminal he is. Only one person is above the law in this country," another person offered.

"So it seems that she’s trying to help Trump by delaying as much as she can, but also not ruling in a way that will ensure she’s not removed," one individual said.